John Manuel: Thanks to everybody for coming out. I'll get to as many questions as I can.

John Manuel: That's a fair read on Berken. He's shown better command than the typical Tommy John alumnus and not quite the same recovery of velocity. I got the feeling that his pitchability was so good that even a slight improvement in velocity and quality of his stuff would put him on the road toward reaching that No. 3-No. 4 starter ceiling you described. Pitchers from Clemson who listen to Kevin O'Sullivan usually know how to (a) pitch backwards and use their offspeed stuff in fastball counts, because they have to against metal bats, and (b) know the value of pitching off their fastball, because Sully was briefly a pitching coach in the Twins system. In other words, Berken's been well-schooled.

John Manuel: Easy, Tom, though I will say SI Yanks catcher Francisco Cervelli got plenty of support for the list and was in the 21-30 range, if I ranked it out that far. Sapp was an all-star, for what that's worth (though he struggled in that game). He threw out 17 of 25 opposing basestealers, and managers I talked to said nothing negative about his receiving skills, other than that they need some polish. He's also got legitimate raw power, despite what he showed in the league this year--remember, he was 18 in a league of 21+ year olds. Stats mean a lot less at the short-season level than they do, say, at Double-A. At this level, Sapp did enough to rank highly on the list.

John Manuel: Two obvious names jump to mind--Evan Longoria and Billy Rowell. Those were the No. 3 and No. 9 overall picks in this year's draft and would have ranked 1-2 in the league had they been eligible. Longoria was particularly impressive in his eight games, I mean, it seems like everyone saw him even though he played eight games, and the same was true of Rowell. Both guys had no trouble adjusting to wood, and in Rowell's case, seeing as how he hasn't played in the Cape Cod League like Longoria, that was particularly impressive.

John Manuel: Negrych has a shot; there's no way to know after a half-season for most of these guys making their debut. Negrych's value is almost all tied up in his bat, but he's hit in the past, and he's shown some savvy as a hitter. Most guys who hit 6 HRs in the Cape Cod League (as he did last summer) has a feel for hitting. The only guy I can think of who had a big, big Cape in terms of home runs and just never even got close to the majors was Georgia's Doc Brooks. And I think he's still kicking around somewhere. So Negrych's bat will keep giving him a chance. Also, P.J. Hiser's had a decent minor league career, so chin up for ex-Panthers in pro ball.

John Manuel: He was a tough call to leave off, definitely was a close call, and honestly, my 11-25 list was pretty fluid. But at some point, you have to pick 20 and just go; we do have deadlines. Most managers thought he was pretty mechanical both with his swing and his defense, but clearly he has offensive potential, and power potential. He also performed. I'm not reaady to believe just yet, but I could be easily convinced.

John Manuel: That's a fair read, though his late slide really seemed to stick out to the managers I talked to that had seen him. He's younger than fellow SI Yanks Norton and Kontos certainly, but those guys also have big fastballs, and they also have more advanced secondary stuff. Castillo has upside but seems to lack consistency from both his breaking ball and his control.

John Manuel: I wouldn't quite go that far, but he's in the discussion. I'd go with Jaime Garcia, the LHP who reached high Class A this year and was a Futures Gamer, and for some reason, I still think Blake Hawksworth could amount to something; his comeback is kind of neat for lack of a better word. But Ottavino is right in that mix, no doubt. He succeeded the same way he pitched in college, then had some success while making adjustments and working on his sinker and changeup. Doing both is what's so impressive.

John Manuel: They pitched a combined 10 1-3 innings. so that's kind of an impossible question. But I'll indulge you since I like Melancon a lot and think Kennedy is solid but not spectacular. Kennedy would probably have to go No. 3; I like both catchers at Nos. 3 and 4 now, but Kennedy has a chance to move very quickly because he commands the fastball. I think his ceiling is limited to that of a No. 3 or No. 4 starter, but he has pitchability to spare when he's at his best. I love Melancon and would take him over Masterson, as good as Masterson was this year. Masterson's most realistic ceiling is that of Mike Timlin-esque setup man, while Melancon, if healthy, can be a closer. I've heard so many good things about Melancon's makeup, I believe in him pretty strongly and thought that was a great pick for the Yanks.

John Manuel: Keep in mind those are two HUGE leagues. Huge--28 clubs between them I believe. So that's a factor. Also, the Pirates jumped their 2006 first-rounder over both of those two leagues. Their two top guys sound like Pat Bresnahan, who is interesting (more on him later), and Mike Felix, who didn't throw consistent enough strikes for me to rank him but who has lots of arm strength and is lefthanded, two good things going for him. Steve McFarland, out of Lamar, also has a big arm, kind of a classic high-risk, high-reward Pirates pick. Don't despair, the big league team is showing signs of life in the second half, which is frankly more important.

John Manuel: Like I said . . . Bresnahan's a Massachusetts guy, Eddie. I was surprised when he ended up at Arizona State, and then he got caught up like a lot of ASU pitchers, where the track record for Pat Murphy's clubs is, he builds his pitching staff from the back forward. Power arms (like Nationals farmhand Zech Zenicoloa, same recruiting class, similar profile, also had a great pro debut) often get shuttled between the rotation and the bullpen, and scouts in Arizona this year just weren't too impressed with Bresnahan's secondary stuff or feel for changing speeds. I didn't hear much about that in the NY-P; it sounds like he sat in the low 90s with his sinking fastball, worked off it and was able to keep the ball on the ground. If his slider improves, he can be a back-of-the-rotation type of guy. I look at his overall track record going back to college and just want him to prove it again, because the tools sound the same.

John Manuel: No beef, just thought there were 20 guys better. My take on ranking relief pitchers at these levels is, if the guy has a wicked, wicked fastball, he's got a chance of cranking the rankings. Walker has a slider and a curveball, he throws both for strikes at any time . . . but when people say "his fastball needs more consistency," I put him more in the "sleeper" category than in the "prospect" category. If he's doing that at Double-A, producing like that, I'm more interested, but at this level, I was comfortable leaving him off the list, despite his commendable performance.

John Manuel: Yeah, they were, but with a league this big, it's a matter of personal preference, how the sources I talked to saw these players, etc. Daley has the biggest arm; I probably was not his biggest fan in the spring, for a guy with his arm strength, he hasn't been too great at getting strikeouts, but he improved with State College. He's got a chance. Degerman and Furnish are more pitchability types than stuff guys, and frankly, with the exception of Degerman's unusual, Iron Mike delivery, those two guys are fairly typical and are the kind of guys who will have to perform at every level to be considered big league rotation fodder.

John Manuel: You make good points; here are mine. The older guys were listed specifically because I think they can move quickly, particularly Smith. Norton's got a different background, a fresher arm than the typical college 23 year old (he's the only 23 year old by the dates we used), plus a fastball-split combo that I think can move quickly. McBryde is the only non-teenager in the top four, and he's an unusual cat as an athletic catcher. The other older guys are players who have had injury issues (Maxwell, Berken) that I believe they can overcome, because when healthy, they have better tools than most of the rest of the league, plus track records of performance. If I had a 23-year-old at No. 1, I think that would be a mistake, but I don't; we have the younger guys toward the top. An older player can be a prospect at this level, but I agree, they need to move quickly.

John Manuel: He's a fast-moving middle reliever--no more, no less. He apparently will be given a chance to get to New York next year, according to our information. I don't know if he'll be effective in a year, but he should be soon thereafter due to his deception, toughness and solid stuff.

John Manuel: I need to speed up my pace here, hope you don't mind shorter answers . . .

John Manuel: Winters pitched so many innings, it's hard to believe that I didn't get a better read on him, but if there's someone I may regret leaving off, it may be him. Tall, projectable, easy (though average, perhaps a tick above) velocity . . . fortunately for the Marlins, they can take it slow with him, because they were crowded at Greensboro and of course have plenty of young pitching in the big leagues.

John Manuel: The fact he didn't make the list says it all; ask Will Lingo, I love a good submariner more than the next guy (when we shared an office, he got tired of my Colter Bean and Derrick DePriest rants) . . . but he sounds like he's a couple of notches behind Joseph Smith, not that kind of stuff. Good moxie, good name, and certainly the baseball vibe in that family is strong. I've been wrong on one Papelbon so maybe Joshua will make it two.

John Manuel: Lots of good closers in the league, he's up for that discussion (I just e-mailed about the Tigers top 30 today with the writer doing it for us; not me this year), but I felt other closers like the ones already mentioned and Aberdeen's Luis Lebron deserved consideration for this NY-P list more than Jensen.

John Manuel: You're welcome--lots of intelligent, polite questions today. Thanks everyone. Martin was the Cyclones' most impressive position player, solid tools, best tool is the bat, still, nothing really special there. Good is the word used to describe him a lot. Of those pitchers, Brown seems very interesting, fastball has life and is in the upper 80s, and he's a converted two-way player, so he's somewhat athletic and might have more velo in there. Ruckle and Mizell really didn't do a lot for anyone, solid average guys, again, nothing special going on there stuff wise, but they both performed, particularly Mizell in the NY-P.

John Manuel: If that's what you got from my first answer, let me state clearly that was NOT my intention. For me, Longoria's among the top 10 prospects in the game, and Rowell's not in that discussion. Longoria's bat is truly significant, he's just 20 (actually younger than Delmon Young), and he's a good defender at two infield spots and could fill in at SS in a pinch. Longoria belongs in the discussion you are talking about (though you left out Ryan Braun, maybe I'm the last one to be that high on him, but man, he has serious bat speed and tools) . . . Rowell doesn't belong in that discussion until we know he can play 3B. (For that matter, we don't know that on Braun, do we?) Rowell CAN really hit, but so can Longoria.

John Manuel: Man, that was tough, I really like Aaron Bates. He can flat hit, and he will hit throughout the minors. If he could catch like he did back in the day for Bill Pintard and the SB Foresters, I'd definitely rank him. He's like a poor man's Ryan Garko--RH-hitting 1B, great feel for the bat head and for getting the fat part of the bat on the ball. He's actually bigger than Garko, uses the whole field . . . but, as a 1B, he needs to show more power for me to have ranked him. Just knowing his track record in college at San Jose State, the Foresters, NC State, the Cape . . . projecting him to hit for big time power is iffy.

John Manuel: Matt McBride is No. 3 on the list. The next 2 C's that merited mention were Cervelli (already discussed) at Staten Island and Esposito at Lowell, who has excellent catch-and-throw skills, sub-2.0 second times to second base and good aggressiveness. He just needs to show more with the bat.

John Manuel: I'm not a huge Donald guy; I always lump him in with Arizona State's Colin Curtis, who also was in the league at Staten Island. Those guys do a lot of things OK, or a lot of things pretty well, but neither has a standout tool. To me, they are both extra guys--Donald's an extra IF, Curtis is an extra OF. That's fine, they would both probably be satisfied with long careers as extra players, but I don't see a standout tool that makes either a big league regular--or that would command big bonuses. That $1.8 figure's a bit inflated according to everything I've heard, by the way, I've heard seven figures, but not that high.

John Manuel: Both did; Nickerson didn't qualify for the list, Gagnier barely did, hard to figure those out for this league. Gagnier has plenty of tenacity but not quite the refinement or control that you'd like to see out of a college pitcher who doesn't have overwhelming stuff. Nickerson, he's John Hudgins Part II (without the Pac-10 baseball website). CWS MOP, over-used in Omaha, but unlike Hudgy-bear, Nickerson got his ring. Neither is overly physical and both have tons of savvy to go with fringe-average stuff. I always believed John Hudgins would make the major leagues. Perhaps I was wrong on that; he's gotten hurt and it hasn't happened for him yet. I hope Nickerson stays healthy, because with his profile, I think he can be a No. 4-5 starter.

John Manuel: Very physical, hard-throwing lefty, needs a lot of polish and improved command, he was in the same boat as Wagner and Lebron as hard-throwing relievers who were under consideration. Apparently, he'll be pitching in winter ball in Venezuela.

John Manuel: Hey, I like Jonah, but not that much. Might have been in the 17-20 range. I mean, he's got a lot less stuff and physical projection than George Kontos at 15.

John Manuel: In the mix, very solid player, didn't wow anybody, sounds like he's actually moving to the right side of the bag (2b).

John Manuel: Always liked Moore, liked his pitchability at UNC Wilmington, just think his combination of age and very average (fringy) stuff and plus command wasn't enough.

John Manuel: OK, Paul, I'll bite, though I'm not sure why. Pope got compared to GlenAllen Hill when he was in high school, and that seems to be a comp that's still valid--very strong, great bat speed, not the greatest athlete, very good raw power, really has a chance to hit. He's raw, that's why he struggled so much in the NY-P, particularly in terms of pitch recognition. He's going to need a lot of BP to figure out what breaking balls to lay off of, but I still like the bat speed and the GlenAllen Hill comp.

John Manuel: Two managers compared him to Brian McCann, Bill. Here's the quote from one to refute what you have to say about him: "He moved well and had a really good arm. He didn't hit, but I liked how he swung the bat and thought he just was tired. When he did hit it, the ball really jumped, different from the other guys." I think that as a BA subscriber, you realize how difficult it is to project young prospects at low levels like this, so you at least assume a level of informed opinion from us. That's what this was. Our information on him, coming from professionals in baseball, is quite different from your observation.

John Manuel: Not quite . . upper 80s velocity, still some projection, touched the low 90s but he's still got work to do. He's making progress, the Rays like him, but it wasn't enough for this list.

John Manuel: Best thing is, he was hurt, so you really can't evaluate his year. Let him get healthy, then evaluate him.

John Manuel: Johnson's a starter, he just was handled with care. I think Masterson has a chance to start because he commands the fastball so well, but I've already thrown out the Timlin comp and will stick to that role as his ceiling.

John Manuel: Not so fast my friend; wait until you see what is (or isn't) at the upper levels of the system. We should give the Cards credit for Chris Duncan, quite a season for him as a long-delayed rookie. but there's not a lot at the top of that system, and 2005 first-rounders Tyler Greene and Mark McCormick didn't exactly go forward this year.

John Manuel: Somewhat close--college senior sign, he's 22, and while he does have an above-average tool (run), and has more pop than you'd expect, it's still hard to see him as an everyday player . .. for me, he's an extra OF, and I thought the guys I ranked had a better chance to be everyday guys.